One of my friends from out of the country asked me the difference between National and State Parks. Well, obviously the main difference is who owns them, but it kind of got me thinking and I noticed from my experience growing up in the DC area there were some general differences.
National Parks seem a lot more prominent and scenic and attract visitors from all around the country, State Parks are more lowkey and known in the state or local area. A lot of times a state park will be nearby to a national park. I’m curious what everyone else has noticed.
3 comments
Well I think to be named a national park you have to be pretty great. Then next best are special enough to be recognized at the state level and so forth.
I had a National Park ranger explain the difference to me.
National Parks are designed for conservation. State parks are designed for utilization.
National Parks prioritize the protection of their resources over everything else. They want to ensure the land and animals are conserved for future generations.
State parks are built to encourage people to get out in nature.
This difference is why national parks will have minimal trails in many instances, permits limiting who can hike back country, limits on pets and more, while state parks will have water parks.
A National Park is one type of federal natural lands, there are many more. A state park is defined by that state’s law or policy and may not be treated the same as the neighboring state. In other words, there are no specific differences. Historically, state lands have been easier to sell off, which may or may not be the case now.